On Sunday’s broadcast of NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Newark, N.J. Democratic Mayor Cory Booker pushed back at efforts by President Barack Obama’s campaign to malign former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for the time he spent at Bain Capital.

Booker first suggested that the Obama campaign needed to avoid letting others define what his presidency has accomplished. However, the attacks on Romney for his time as head of Bain Capital, he said, made him “uncomfortable.”

“[A]s far as that stuff, I have to say from a very personal level, I’m not about to sit here and indict private equity,” Booker said. “It’s just, to me, we’re getting to a ridiculous point in America. Especially, I know — I live in a state where pension funds, unions and other people are investing in companies like Bain Capital. If you look at the totality of the record of Bain Capital, they’ve done a lot to support businesses, to grow businesses. This, to me, I’m very uncomfortable with.”

"This kind of stuff is nauseating to me on both sides. It's nauseating to the American public. Enough is enough, stop attacking private equity. Stop attacking Jeremiah Wright," Booker said. "This stuff has got to stop because what it does is, it undermines to me what this country should be focused on."

"The sexy stuff of campaigns that the media plays over and over again that we wasted time talking about is this negative stuff," Booker said. "The reality is – and I listen to Obama. I have Obama surrogate notes here, they're talking about the positive issues."

After an onslaught of attention following his Sunday show appearance, Booker took to YouTube Sunday afternoon to reiterate his support of the president and elaborate on his frustrations with current state of political campaigns.

Booker said Obama "more than deserves re-election," but that he hopes the general election will focus on the "issues that count."

"I am indeed upset. I am indeed frustrated," Booker said. "But I believe the American public, working together can more and more denounce this type of campaigning and more and more focus on the issues that count."

Wow... he sounds like most Americans.. he's basically slamming the 'system' in which I agree.. ya hear that super PACS? Too bad ridd.. must spin his 'version' of events.

It's actually sort of funny watching some of the posters to this thread leap to conclusions.

While one partisan says that Cory Booker is doing this for the money from finance because he has such a lock on voters with his popularity, the alternative view is that he speaks the truth and didn't feel like he needed to take the leftward leap of the Democrats.

After criticizing the Bain ads on "Meet the Press," Booker took to YouTube to add more context to his remarks -- but he stood by his assertion that such attack ads were "nauseating." Booker said he was expressing his "profound frustration with the kind of campaigning that I think is becoming too much of the norm."

Instead of promoting Booker's nearly four-minute video, the Obama campaign promoted via Twitter an edited, 35-second version which focused on Booker's defense of the attacks against Romney: "Mitt Romney has made his business record a centerpiece of his campaign," Booker said, adding that scrutiny on that record is "reasonable" and that he would "encourage it."

Republicans slammed the Obama team for its handling of the response. "Obama clamping down on @corybooker shows that democrats are no longer allowed to defend free market," Republican National Committee chairman Reince Priebus tweeted.

The RNC later put a petition online called "I stand with Cory," which said, "That's right Mr. President, we aren't going to let you destroy free enterprise. Stand up for America. Stand up for job creators."

It's telling where some people are getting their news from given that the "Obama campaign Press Secretary Ben LaBolt was caught tweeting out Booker’s hostage video but cut down to just 35-seconds, making the mayor’s remarks seem much more apologetic": "What gets lost in the edit is the nuance of Booker’s argument. Watching the 35-second video, you would believe that Booker was flip-flopping from his comments on Meet The Press and going on an all-out assault on Romney. In the four-minute video, Booker stands by his comments — including “nauseating” — and explains that while he does think Romney’s record is fair game, he remains “furstrated” by the Obama campaign’s negative attacks." http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2012/05/21/awkward-obama-campaign-looks-to-explain-spreading-heavily-edited-version-of-cory-booker-hostage-video/

Yet comments over the past two weeks from former White House “car czar” Steve Rattner, Booker and former Rep. Harold Ford underscore the different campaign needs of Obama and fundraising needs of his party, which has already seen a drop-off in Wall Street contributions across the board over the past few years.

“It’s a big problem for the party because the Democrats’ fundraising base is shrinking,” said Democratic strategist Dan Gerstein, who advised Joe Lieberman’s Senate run as an independent in 2006. “Old sources are not as reliable, so they are scared to slaughter one of their most productive cash cows. It’s the reason why we had the Glass-Steagall repeal, the housing bubble and no oversight of Wall Street during the run-up to the collapse. But clutching onto that old lifeline is a major danger for Democrats.”

“The country is on to the con and knows that the system has been rigged to favor certain interests,” he added. “The irony, of course, is that if Obama had adopted this critique at the beginning of his term instead of the end, he probably wouldn’t be nearly as weak as he is now. Bailouts would not have been such an albatross around his neck, he would have got more credit for the auto-industry saving, and the tea party never would have got the traction it did in the 2010 cycle.”

Indeed, the perception that Obama is not bowing to the concerns of donor elites ultimately serves the president well. That’s especially true if he can walk a line of his own on criticizing elements of Wall Street and the relevance of private equity to Romney’s résumé while raising from Wall Street donors himself. Obama has run against his party before, and his team tends to prefer it as a brand-strengthening exercise.

I live over the bay from Newark, Newark was the leader in violent crime reduction when he first took office. He's done a lot of good, and though a bit overrated (like Obama) he genuinely cares about the people and actively joins in community events. I believe he saved a woman from a flaming building a few weeks ago. He hasn't been consistent since he first office, but Newark was no joke 10+ years ago. A fucking mess.

BP201 saidI live over the bay from Newark, Newark was the leader in violent crime reduction when he first took office. He's done a lot of good, and though a bit overrated (like Obama) he genuinely cares about the people and actively joins in community events. I believe he saved a woman from a flaming building a few weeks ago. He hasn't been consistent since he first office, but Newark was no joke 10+ years ago. A fucking mess.

Booker said that GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney's experience leading the private equity firm Bain Capital should be on the table, after saying on Sunday that he was not going "to sit here and indict private equity." Republicans who seized upon that remark only motivated Booker more, the mayor said Monday.

"If anything they've turned me on," Booker said of the backlash from Republicans.

Booker said he felt "used" by the Republican National Committee, which highlighted the remarks in an e-mail to supporters, and said that a Sunday afternoon response he made on YouTube after the comments went viral was not at the request of the Obama campaign.

One of President Barack Obama’s top campaign spokesmen is a private equity manager whose firm has shut down several factories and laid off hundreds of people amid a stalled economy.

Federico Pena’s role at Vestar Capital Partners has emerged as Obama’s aides and deputies continue their effort to portray former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney‘s investment career as ruthless, job-destroying, profit-maximizing “vulture capitalism.” Pena has been a partner at Vestar since 2000.

Pena is a former mayor of Denver in swing-state Colorado, a former cabinet member for President Bill Clinton and one of 35 “national co-chairs “ of the president’s 2012 campaign.

The news will likely further undermine the Obama campaign’s effort to focus on Romney’s business practices, rather than Obama’s White House policies, and the resulting debt, deficits and unemployment.

The effort has been stymied by a series of business-friendly Democratic politicians — such as Newark Mayor Cory Booker — who have stepped forward to defend or praise the investment sector.

Pena’s private-equity role was highlighted by CompleteColorado.com, a Drudge-mimicking news aggregator.

One of President Barack Obama’s top campaign spokesmen is a private equity manager whose firm has shut down several factories and laid off hundreds of people amid a stalled economy.

Federico Pena’s role at Vestar Capital Partners has emerged as Obama’s aides and deputies continue their effort to portray former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney‘s investment career as ruthless, job-destroying, profit-maximizing “vulture capitalism.” Pena has been a partner at Vestar since 2000.

Pena is a former mayor of Denver in swing-state Colorado, a former cabinet member for President Bill Clinton and one of 35 “national co-chairs “ of the president’s 2012 campaign.

The news will likely further undermine the Obama campaign’s effort to focus on Romney’s business practices, rather than Obama’s White House policies, and the resulting debt, deficits and unemployment.

The effort has been stymied by a series of business-friendly Democratic politicians — such as Newark Mayor Cory Booker — who have stepped forward to defend or praise the investment sector.

Pena’s private-equity role was highlighted by CompleteColorado.com, a Drudge-mimicking news aggregator.

Actually this proves the exact opposite, that the president is not opposed to private equity per se but just the way Romney practiced it.

One of President Barack Obama’s top campaign spokesmen is a private equity manager whose firm has shut down several factories and laid off hundreds of people amid a stalled economy.

Federico Pena’s role at Vestar Capital Partners has emerged as Obama’s aides and deputies continue their effort to portray former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney‘s investment career as ruthless, job-destroying, profit-maximizing “vulture capitalism.” Pena has been a partner at Vestar since 2000.

Pena is a former mayor of Denver in swing-state Colorado, a former cabinet member for President Bill Clinton and one of 35 “national co-chairs “ of the president’s 2012 campaign.

The news will likely further undermine the Obama campaign’s effort to focus on Romney’s business practices, rather than Obama’s White House policies, and the resulting debt, deficits and unemployment.

The effort has been stymied by a series of business-friendly Democratic politicians — such as Newark Mayor Cory Booker — who have stepped forward to defend or praise the investment sector.

Pena’s private-equity role was highlighted by CompleteColorado.com, a Drudge-mimicking news aggregator.

Actually this proves the exact opposite, that the president is not opposed to private equity per se but just the way Romney practiced it.

Which again shows how little you understand of the private equity world - especially given that Bain Capital is one of the better firms out there.

One of President Barack Obama’s top campaign spokesmen is a private equity manager whose firm has shut down several factories and laid off hundreds of people amid a stalled economy.

Federico Pena’s role at Vestar Capital Partners has emerged as Obama’s aides and deputies continue their effort to portray former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney‘s investment career as ruthless, job-destroying, profit-maximizing “vulture capitalism.” Pena has been a partner at Vestar since 2000.

Pena is a former mayor of Denver in swing-state Colorado, a former cabinet member for President Bill Clinton and one of 35 “national co-chairs “ of the president’s 2012 campaign.

The news will likely further undermine the Obama campaign’s effort to focus on Romney’s business practices, rather than Obama’s White House policies, and the resulting debt, deficits and unemployment.

The effort has been stymied by a series of business-friendly Democratic politicians — such as Newark Mayor Cory Booker — who have stepped forward to defend or praise the investment sector.

Pena’s private-equity role was highlighted by CompleteColorado.com, a Drudge-mimicking news aggregator.

Actually this proves the exact opposite, that the president is not opposed to private equity per se but just the way Romney practiced it.

Which again shows how little you understand of the private equity world - especially given that Bain Capital is one of the better firms out there.

I'm quite familiar with it. The problem for Romney is that he's running as a "job creator" but was 47 of 50 in job growth with 48-50 being states hit by Hurricane Katrina. So he's tried to use Bain instead but as the firm's other partners have admitted, they company doesn't exist to create jobs but to maximize wealth for its investors.

One of President Barack Obama’s top campaign spokesmen is a private equity manager whose firm has shut down several factories and laid off hundreds of people amid a stalled economy.

Federico Pena’s role at Vestar Capital Partners has emerged as Obama’s aides and deputies continue their effort to portray former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney‘s investment career as ruthless, job-destroying, profit-maximizing “vulture capitalism.” Pena has been a partner at Vestar since 2000.

Pena is a former mayor of Denver in swing-state Colorado, a former cabinet member for President Bill Clinton and one of 35 “national co-chairs “ of the president’s 2012 campaign.

The news will likely further undermine the Obama campaign’s effort to focus on Romney’s business practices, rather than Obama’s White House policies, and the resulting debt, deficits and unemployment.

The effort has been stymied by a series of business-friendly Democratic politicians — such as Newark Mayor Cory Booker — who have stepped forward to defend or praise the investment sector.

Pena’s private-equity role was highlighted by CompleteColorado.com, a Drudge-mimicking news aggregator.

Actually this proves the exact opposite, that the president is not opposed to private equity per se but just the way Romney practiced it.

Which again shows how little you understand of the private equity world - especially given that Bain Capital is one of the better firms out there.

I'm quite familiar with it. The problem for Romney is that he's running as a "job creator" but was 47 of 50 in job growth with 48-50 being states hit by Hurricane Katrina. So he's tried to use Bain instead but as the firm's other partners have admitted, they company doesn't exist to create jobs but to maximize wealth for its investors.

That you think the two ideas can be divorced is indicative of how out of touch you are with respect to private equity or even finance.

Christian73 saidI'm quite familiar with it. The problem for Romney is that he's running as a "job creator" but was 47 of 50 in job growth with 48-50 being states hit by Hurricane Katrina. So he's tried to use Bain instead but as the firm's other partners have admitted, they company doesn't exist to create jobs but to maximize wealth for its investors.

Based on what you write, you really don't understand PE. As far as the objective of PE, of course the direct goal is maximizing wealth for investors, which include public employee pension funds and grandma's savings. In the process, some jobs are lost, but more are saved and some created by successful PE firms.

Christian73 saidI'm quite familiar with it. The problem for Romney is that he's running as a "job creator" but was 47 of 50 in job growth with 48-50 being states hit by Hurricane Katrina. So he's tried to use Bain instead but as the firm's other partners have admitted, they company doesn't exist to create jobs but to maximize wealth for its investors.

Based on what you write, you really don't understand PE. As far as the objective of PE, of course the direct goal is maximizing wealth for investors, which include public employee pension funds and grandma's savings. In the process, some jobs are lost, but more are saved and some created by successful PE firms.

This is for you and Riddler:

We are talking specifically about Romney's tenure at Bain Capital, which he has put forward as the primary reason he should replace Obama. The Romney campaign cannot run on being 47 out of 50 in job creation, so they've gone to Bain. The claims from Romney et al is that he understands the economy and knows how to create jobs based on his time at Bain.

We are not discussing Kohlberg Kravis & Roberts, the Carlyle Group or any number of other PE firms or PE in general.

You, yourselves, have stated Bain as being Romney's most relevant experience based on the now completely debunked "100,000 jobs" figure.

Guess what? The United States isn't a PE firm or an office supply company. So, if Romney doesn't have experience creating jobs in the private or public sector, why exactly is he running on?

Christian73 saidI'm quite familiar with it. The problem for Romney is that he's running as a "job creator" but was 47 of 50 in job growth with 48-50 being states hit by Hurricane Katrina. So he's tried to use Bain instead but as the firm's other partners have admitted, they company doesn't exist to create jobs but to maximize wealth for its investors.

Based on what you write, you really don't understand PE. As far as the objective of PE, of course the direct goal is maximizing wealth for investors, which include public employee pension funds and grandma's savings. In the process, some jobs are lost, but more are saved and some created by successful PE firms.

This is for you and Riddler:

We are talking specifically about Romney's tenure at Bain Capital, which he has put forward as the primary reason he should replace Obama. The Romney campaign cannot run on being 47 out of 50 in job creation, so they've gone to Bain. The claims from Romney et al is that he understands the economy and knows how to create jobs based on his time at Bain.

We are not discussing Kohlberg Kravis & Roberts, the Carlyle Group or any number of other PE firms or PE in general.

You, yourselves, have stated Bain as being Romney's most relevant experience based on the now completely debunked "100,000 jobs" figure.

Guess what? The United States isn't a PE firm or an office supply company. So, if Romney doesn't have experience creating jobs in the private or public sector, why exactly is he running on?

Which again, for you, your claim that this is specific to Bain is bullshit. Bain is not significantly different than a lot of firms (KKR, Carlyle among others). Bain is relevant as experience in understanding how markets work. On the other hand, I don't suppose you've paid attention to Obama's track record at investing public funds?

Watching Obama campaign ads or MSNBC, one could easily come to the conclusion that Bain Capital makes money by destroying the companies it owns. So for voters unsure about the business that Mitt Romney founded but still reluctant to trust the financial analysis offered by community organizers, some perspective might be helpful.

The basic Obama-liberal critique goes like this: Bain buys a company, loads it with debt and then sucks out cash before foisting the wounded business upon an unsuspecting buyer or a bankruptcy court. In the risk-taking world of private equity such a scenario can certainly happen, and it's true that Bain likes management fees and dividends as much as the next partnership.

But then how to explain the history of Bain Capital? Mr. Romney started the business in 1984. The company has since bought and sold many businesses and executed thousands of financing transactions.

If Bain's standard operating procedure were to hand the next owner of one of its companies a ticking bankruptcy package, how is Bain still finding buyers nearly three decades later? And who would agree to lend money to a company backed by Bain? Wouldn't word have gotten around by, say, 1987 that Bain's portfolio companies weren't creditworthy?

The liberal critique of private equity assumes that the financial industry is full of saps who have been eager to lose money across the table from Bain for 28 years. This is the same financial industry that the same liberal critics say is full of greedy schemers when it comes to padding their own pay or ripping off consumers. But financiers can't be both knaves and diabolical geniuses at the same time.

Learning about Bain successes like Staples or Gartner or Steel Dynamics confirms the logical conclusion that Bain had to be creating value along the way—for investors, for lenders, and that means for workers too.

Part 3 - Cutting through the rhetoric and dealing with substance on Romney, Bain Capital, and Private Equityhttp://www.realjock.com/gayforums/2048036/Ground already covered, but still not understood by some. Contains links to specific Bain Fund descriptions.

riddler78 saidOn the other hand, I don't suppose you've paid attention to Obama's track record at investing public funds?

No to worry, the rest of the American people have been paying attention

For the sake of the US, I hope so. It's literally insane. It's not as if these issues of entitlements are sudden. Politicians from both parties have refused to deal with the inevitable as if the math will somehow correct itself. Instead some like Bush have even added onto the series of entitlements, while others like Obama seem to spend like there's no tomorrow on things that will never have a return.

1.Executive ability2.Leadership skills3.Understanding how the private sector works4.Understanding and implementing policies that allow the private sector to grow

All of which trumps your community organizer, etc.

1st Question for John et al: Is the United States

A) a for-profit corporation or B) a constitutional democratic republic?

Answer: B

2nd Question for John et al: Which of the following advanced degrees is relevant to the governance of a constitutional democratic republic?

A) MBA or B) a JD in Constitutional Law

Answer: B

3rd Question for John et al: Which of the following career trajectories is applicable to the office of POTUS?

A) Corporate raider with four years as governor during which your state has the 47th worst job creation record, you passed healthcare reform with no way to rein in spending, and you spent more than 50% of your time out of the state you were allegedly governing?

B) Community organizer who helped poor families access services to improve their lives followed by private sector corporate lawyer followed by Constitutional Law professor followed by state senator and finally US Senator?

Christian73 saidI'm quite familiar with it. The problem for Romney is that he's running as a "job creator" but was 47 of 50 in job growth with 48-50 being states hit by Hurricane Katrina. So he's tried to use Bain instead but as the firm's other partners have admitted, they company doesn't exist to create jobs but to maximize wealth for its investors.

Based on what you write, you really don't understand PE. As far as the objective of PE, of course the direct goal is maximizing wealth for investors, which include public employee pension funds and grandma's savings. In the process, some jobs are lost, but more are saved and some created by successful PE firms.

This is for you and Riddler:

We are talking specifically about Romney's tenure at Bain Capital, which he has put forward as the primary reason he should replace Obama. The Romney campaign cannot run on being 47 out of 50 in job creation, so they've gone to Bain. The claims from Romney et al is that he understands the economy and knows how to create jobs based on his time at Bain.

We are not discussing Kohlberg Kravis & Roberts, the Carlyle Group or any number of other PE firms or PE in general.

You, yourselves, have stated Bain as being Romney's most relevant experience based on the now completely debunked "100,000 jobs" figure.

Guess what? The United States isn't a PE firm or an office supply company. So, if Romney doesn't have experience creating jobs in the private or public sector, why exactly is he running on?

Which again, for you, your claim that this is specific to Bain is bullshit. Bain is not significantly different than a lot of firms (KKR, Carlyle among others). Bain is relevant as experience in understanding how markets work. On the other hand, I don't suppose you've paid attention to Obama's track record at investing public funds?

Incorrect. Neither Henry Kravis, nor David Rubenstein are running for president on the basis that their work in PE created jobs, after failing to do so spectacularly as governor.

The issue is Romney running on his claim as a job creator via Bain Capital. Had he been a successful governor, his tenure at Bain would be far less relevant but we both know he can't run on that.

So the right argues (falsely) that attacks on Romney's record as Bain CEO = attack on Bain = attack on PE = attack on capitalism.

By this logic, an attack on Obama = attack on presidency = attack on American political system = attack on Democracy.